The defense of former president Carles Puigdemont filed two complaints against Spain on Monday before European bodies in response to the Court of Auditors’ refusal to apply the Amnesty Law to the thirty former senior officials of the Catalan administration who are being claimed for the expenses of the procés. The auditing body, once the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was known, which responded to the preliminary questions it had raised in 2024, reactivated the case and instead of applying criminal oblivion, opened a ten-day period for the parties to make allegations and provide documentation proving the origin of the funds destined for the 1-O referendum and the external action of the Generalitat.
Read more Feijóo declares the legislature over and promises a government of «reconstruction»
In the opinion of the former president’s defense, led by lawyer Gonzalo Boye, this maneuver contravenes the Luxembourg resolution, which stated that new allegations should not be presented if criminal oblivion applies. For this reason, he presented two written submissions, one to the CJEU itself and another to the European Commission, so that the community body would take action on the matter. Specifically, Boye has filed a “complaint for breach of Union law” with the Commission.
How does this procedure work?
When a complaint of this type is filed with Brussels, it is up to the Commission itself to admit or dismiss the complaint, investigate the reported facts and, if it deems it appropriate, open an infringement procedure against the country, which could begin with an informal dialogue between the parties known as EU Pilot. Brussels usually opens files for not transposing community directives into national legislation. According to the former president’s defense, the submission to the CJEU reinforces the complaint to the community body. Specifically, if the procedure is opened, the member state in question has two months to respond by letter to the Commission, and from there it is decided whether the case is closed or whether an opinion is issued and a further two-month period is given to correct the situation. The sanctioning phase comes later, goes through the courts and is economic.
“If the Commission considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil one of its obligations under the Treaties, it shall issue a reasoned opinion on the matter after giving that State the opportunity to submit its observations. If the State concerned does not comply with this opinion within the period determined by the Commission, the latter may bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union,” states Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in this regard.
What is the origin of the complaint?
Beyond sending two complaints to Brussels and Luxembourg, Puigdemont’s defense has also sent a letter to the Court of Auditors in which, as the public prosecutor’s office also did yesterday, it reproaches the auditing body for having made this maneuver instead of closing the cases and for having evaded the CJEU ruling, which clarifies that there was no affectation of community funds or the financial interests of the Union. The letter sent to the auditing body also states that two letters have been sent to European bodies for, in its opinion, failing to comply with the Luxembourg ruling.
Are there other precedents?
Puigdemont’s lawyer believes that there are analogous precedents of other countries that have been sanctioned for failing to comply with CJEU rulings. This is the case, for example, of Poland and Hungary. Warsaw was ordered to pay a daily fine of one million euros, he points out. Puigdemont himself, in a post on the social network X, recalls that Poland was indeed fined and asks if “the European Union will tolerate in Madrid what it demanded in Warsaw.” “If what was demanded in Warsaw is tolerated in Madrid, the Commission would be certifying that European rulings are complied with or not depending on who the accused is,” he adds.
Why has Spain been reported?
Although in this case it is the Court of Auditors that has avoided applying the amnesty, the complaint is against the Kingdom of Spain. This is how European justice works. When a Spanish court oversteps legal limits or commits a human rights violation, the condemnation always goes against the Kingdom of Spain in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, for example. In this case, the same applies.
Read also
Thus, if tomorrow the Supreme Court decided to act in the same way and refused to apply criminal oblivion to the leaders of the procés in the event that the Constitutional Court granted them protection, it has also been planned to file lawsuits against Spain before European institutions.
Read more The Ronda de Dalt begins to culminate the covering of the second phase in Vall d’Hebron
